Re: Relicensing Nautilus to GPLv3+

[Ernestas Kulik <ernestask gnome org>]

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 16:20 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> If nautilus is GPLv3+, that means we can't link it against GPLv2-only
> or LGPLv2-only libraries in the extensions.

That’s fair.

> I'm also not opening the
> can of worms that is non-GPL-compatible dependencies of extensions
> (such as proprietary, or patent-encumbered GStreamer plugins), because
> that's an existing problem.

Loading GPL-incompatibly-licensed extensions is already a problem. For
all I know, it always was.

> What's the end goal for relicensing? What problems do the current
> license cause that require a relicense?

The end goal here is to announce what has been the case since at least
two years ago (sans libnautilus-extension). We’ve got code that is
licensed under GPLv3+ and we’ve wanted to use code licensed under
GPLv3+, but, ironically, didn’t, because of these issues.

Having libnautilus-extension licensed under LGPL makes no sense if the
extensions have to be compatible with GPL when loaded.